An unverified report out of the Far East on Friday claims that Apple will use a version of Qualcomm's Snapdragon system on a chip in a much-rumored low-cost iPhone, with manufacture of the purported handset expected to begin in the second quarter.

Spotted by Japanese blogMacotakara, the China Times report cited an unnamed industry watcher as saying that Apple plans to use Taiwanese chipmaker TSMC's 28nm process to build the cheap iPhone's Snapdragon SoC. If true, the switch away from Samsung's foundries would be a first for the Cupertino company, which has pushed increasingly further into chip design with its latest A6 and A6X processors.

Apple will supposedly continue to manufacture the A-series silicon used in the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S, as well as the A6 chips from the iPhone 5 and fourth-generation iPad.

While suspicious, the rumor is not without merit, as two 28nm-based classes of Snapdragon, specifically the 400 and 800 series, offer on-board communications including a cellular modem, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. If Apple is indeed planning to launch a cheap handset in developing markets, the use of an all-in-one platform could save on component costs. Some Snapdragon iterations also come with 4G LTE compatibility, though the publication claims that Apple will stick to 3G for its initial low-cost iPhone.

Additionally, the Chinese publication said Renesas Electronics will produce the device's LCD drivers, while NAND flash memory will be sourced from Toshiba, Elpida, Micron Technology, SK Hynix and SanDisk.

Rumors of a Snapdragon-based iPhone first arose in January, with the firm's dual-core and quad-core SoCs cited as possible candidates for the as-yet-unannounced handset.

Most recently, well-connected analyst Ming-Chi Kuo predicted that Apple would introduce a low-cost iPhone boasting a hybrid fiberglass/plastic case this summer alongside the next-generation "iPhone 5S," though no mention was made of a platform switch.

I believe all those rumours about a low cost iPhone are garbage. Just don't see this happening and Cook's remarks reaffirm this. Apple doesn't build garbage, Apple doesn't need developing markets, where people don't consume content and don't spend money on apps anyway, it is also the premium mentality that adds to Apple's overall image. I believe thinking that future generations that grow up in developing markets and get accustomed to Android or other platforms will stay loyal to those is simply wrong. I do believe people will actually want Apple products, when they'll be able to afford them. Destroying this by offering cheap plastic alternatives does nobody any good. And we all know the margins in the low end market anyway.

At the end of the day, just look at how the iPhone 4S outsold even the Galaxy SIII, which is without a doubt THE Android flagship phone despite the iPhone 5 being available.

We're probably going to see some new device category this year and this will be cheaper than a regular current generation iPhone. That's my two cents.

Apart from this, even if they were to introduce something such as a low cost iPhone, they'd certainly use older generations of their A chip series, let alone for leveraging economics of scale on an even higher level than currently.

Apple don't want fragmentation. They also have special DSPs in their A class SoC.
Its alas cheaper use their own design they using an outside partner.

Most Android OEMs have to buy SocS. For example: The Tegra 2 cost 15 dollar to produce and was sold for 25. A5 cost 25 dollar to produce, but Apple could use 40% more SoC real estate. That was one of the reason why A5 blew the Android SoCs out of the water. (Neon SIMD, Dual channel DDR controller, faster GPU, special DSPs like "Apple visual processor" and the noise cancellation technique used for Siri).

Digi/Trolling times should never be quoted. They are always wrong.

If Apple wants cheaper SoCs: build an own foundry. Apple needs 70K wafer starts each month. Its insane! That would occupy a whole Intel state of the art fab. Why not buy one of Global foundries factories. Especially since AMD cut wafer orders by 50%. (or buy an Intel fab since they are 50% idle because they lost 30% market share to ARM)

I agree that it's unlikely, but they're surely not going to reuse the A4 even in a cheap iPhone. Hell, even the A5 in my 4S feels rather choppy at times. They shouldn't scrimp on the phone's SOC, just give it a cheaper construction and a non-IPS screen to drive down the cost.

More continuously stupid rumors. The upcoming A series latest will be at 28nm from TSMC/GF and if they were ever to come in a lower power setting it will be for an upcoming AppleTV, not a budget phone.

The upcoming A7 will continue to expand on Apple's custom SoC and not a licensed direct ARM design.

Yes, but they could modify it. Nothing wrong with my wife's iPhone 4 on iOS 6. Sure the base A4 is getting long in the tooth, perhaps an A4X could be produced, or more likely they'll simply reuse the A5.

just give it a cheaper construction and a non-IPS screen to drive down the cost.

And this is why the whole low cost iPhone doesn't excite me one bit. I know I'm not the intended customer, but I hope Apple does something unexpected and not just a cheap plastic phone with a crappy screen.

And this is why the whole low cost iPhone doesn't excite me one bit. I know I'm not the intended customer, but I hope Apple does something unexpected and not just a cheap plastic phone with a crappy screen.

You are not the intended customer.

The savings here would be huge, and iOS would presumably run out of the box on Snapdragon - which is ARM7 compatible. You just have to look at iSuppli to see how much the extra chips are costing Apple. Wy wouldn't they use this in a low cost phone? As for the non-IPS screen I believe that is what the iPod touch uses, I don't notice a difference. In fact I don't notice the retina difference all that much,

The savings here would be huge, and iOS would presumably run out of the box on Snapdragon - which is ARM7 compatible. You just have to look at iSuppli to see how much the extra chips are costing Apple. Wy wouldn't they use this in a low cost phone? As for the non-IPS screen I believe that is what the iPod touch uses, I don't notice a difference. In fact I don't notice the retina difference all that much,

Well its just the fact that Apple is going to make something really cheap, using cheap parts. This isn't what Apple does. Apple is a premium brand and using cheap parts to lower the cost isn't going to increase the value of Apple's brand. This would be like BMW or Lexus making a cheap car made with very cheap parts just to serve a lower end market. This whole cheap phone doesn't make any sense to me and I think is taking Apple in the wrong direction.

Next, people are going to want a cheap iPad, cheap Mac (complete solution), etc. If you can't afford an iPhone then oh well. You can't always get what you want.

To my knowledge, the iPod Touch uses the same screen as the iPhone which is why you didn't notice any difference.

Well its just the fact that Apple is going to make something really cheap, using cheap parts. This isn't what Apple does. Apple is a premium brand and using cheap parts to lower the cost isn't going to increase the value of Apple's brand. This would be like BMW or Lexus making a cheap car made with very cheap parts just to serve a lower end market. This whole cheap phone doesn't make any sense to me and I think is taking Apple in the wrong direction.

Next, people are going to want a cheap iPad, cheap Mac (complete solution), etc. If you can't afford an iPhone then oh well. You can't always get what you want.

To my knowledge, the iPod Touch uses the same screen as the iPhone which is why you didn't notice any difference.

This premium brand thing is largely overdone. It's a middle income brand. They don't produce yachts. Apple engages in mass market sales to normal people ( in the West). The market is not the same as the sales of BMW - about 50% of the US has an iPhone for instance.

To increase its market share to normal people in the developing world (not the poor in the developing world) it needs cheaper options. We already know they can produce cheap iOS compatible devices and sell them at $199 - the iPod touch. Thats last years model, but they have previously sold the present years model at that price. (its the one without IPS, and the one I have).

Its cheap, but its not "cheap" - in the sense of being shoddy. I love the touch in fact. Were the iPhone as light, that would be my iPhone.

(In fact - as with the mini - thats Apple's biggest problem with a cheaper iPhone, they need to make the higher priced one compelling. A bigger screen perhaps?).

I agree that it's unlikely, but they're surely not going to reuse the A4 even in a cheap iPhone. Hell, even the A5 in my 4S feels rather choppy at times. They shouldn't scrimp on the phone's SOC, just give it a cheaper construction and a non-IPS screen to drive down the cost.

Even if that were true (and my 4S is plenty fast almost all of the time, certainly never 'choppy'), it doesn't really change anything. So Apple could use the A5 in a low cost phone. Or wait until the A7 is out and use the A6. The cost difference between their own A-series chips and buying from someone else is probably miniscule, so I doubt that they'd go outside for their CPU.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

That 28nm process is still new and would actually increase the costs until all kinks are worked out and they start getting high yields. If anything they'll use a larger process that is putting out excellent yields (cheaper components).

Personally, I think the report misunderstood what Apple is actually doing; I'd be willing to bet that Apple is licensing the radios from Qualcomm and adding them directly onto the A7 SoC as Qualcomm did on their Snapdragon SoCs.

Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.

That 28nm process is still new and would actually increase the costs until all kinks are worked out and they start getting high yields. If anything they'll use a larger process that is putting out excellent yields (cheaper components).

Personally, I think the report misunderstood what Apple is actually doing; I'd be willing to bet that Apple is licensing the radios from Qualcomm and adding them directly onto the A7 SoC as Qualcomm did on their Snapdragon SoCs.

I think you hit the nail on the head with this and it is exactly what came to mind when reading the article. There is prescedent for Apple licensing and including other vendor's technology on their own chip. They licensed and included an Audience controller on the A5. Tim Cook and Steve Jobs have said repeatedly that they want to own and control as much of the strategic underlying tech as possible, so I don't see them going away from designing their own SOC for any iOS device.

Well its just the fact that Apple is going to make something really cheap, using cheap parts. This isn't what Apple does. Apple is a premium brand and using cheap parts to lower the cost isn't going to increase the value of Apple's brand. This would be like BMW or Lexus making a cheap car made with very cheap parts just to serve a lower end market. This whole cheap phone doesn't make any sense to me and I think is taking Apple in the wrong direction.

Next, people are going to want a cheap iPad, cheap Mac (complete solution), etc. If you can't afford an iPhone then oh well. You can't always get what you want.

To my knowledge, the iPod Touch uses the same screen as the iPhone which is why you didn't notice any difference.

In many parts of the world, BMW and Mercedes are cheap. In Isreal you have those vehicles as taxis. Whether or not a product is a quality product is compared to the other products in the particular market. A cheaper made iPhone might be great for developing countries were Apple is getting its butt kicked in the market. I doubt this phone will be sold in the US.

Yeah, but all tests so far prove that *any* Apple processor of a particular year/version always beats out a Snapdragon processor of the same year/version.

It's hard to see why they would use anything other than their own processors which are heavily customised to the operating system anyway. I don't even see them using a very old Apple processor either. The iPad mini struggles mightily under the few restrictions it has for instance. Using anything older than last year's processor or anything from outside of the company would seem like a really foolish thing to do. It would make iOS look like crap and run like molasses.

Even if that were true (and my 4S is plenty fast almost all of the time, certainly never 'choppy'), it doesn't really change anything. So Apple could use the A5 in a low cost phone. Or wait until the A7 is out and use the A6. The cost difference between their own A-series chips and buying from someone else is probably miniscule, so I doubt that they'd go outside for their CPU.

Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.

BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.

And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800

maybe there isn't the capacity from the existing suppliers to increase production of A chips. Move to off the shelf silicon for the new phone so it doesn't impact the higher end products and it also provides more supplier choice (away from Samsung)

Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.

BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.

And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800

I'll say it again in case you're not listening... it's about the OS.

Having the fastest bestest whateverest in the other manufacturer's phones (if that truly is the case as you suggest) doesn't seem to be hurting the sale of the 5, 4S or even the 4.

1) So we have an Apple in-house core. Designed and built from scratch to exactly match Apples specification, costing not a penny more than its cost price, plus a 3rd party modem. And then you have a generic soc designed with tens of partners in mind, sold for profit, with a built-in modem. I can't see the 2nd one providing a significant cost saving over the 1st.

2) Most decent games on IOS use a proprietary texture compression PVRTC, for textures. This does not exist as part of opengles2.0, and is ONLY available on imagination technology graphics cores. Qualcomm is NOT an imagination licencee. Apple would have to be resigned to thousands of games not being compatible with this cut-down iphone.Edited by tangey - 3/8/13 at 8:11am

Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.

BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.

And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800

Sometime in the future(hopefully this year) The most expensive and state of the art Snapdragron may be the fastest on benchmarks. Yet we all know that benchmarks on phones mean nothing for 10s of millions of phone buyers. A couple absolutely need to bend pipes in simulations run on their phones, and these benchmarks will be important to them(me... not that I need to bend pipes, but I need the fastest... because... well... I can't have something slow... it's embarrassing )

The yet to be releasedS4 MAY BE faster than a 1.5 year old Apple Device. - I'm going out on a limb that Moore's law is at work... if the S4 does actually perform... See the 'I don't know'

So? It's not as if Apple couldn't fine tune iOS to run smoothly on a Snapdragon that costs them less to implement than an AX. It's all about cost-cutting if they really want to make a cheaper iPhone.

I take it developing software quality for multiple hardware stacks cost nothing in your universe? And the fact that the AnX have been architected and tuned for iOS, thus the effort will be even harder ($$$).

All this to save... what... 20 to 30 cents per chip set (Remember, Apple's volumes are such that they instantly are your largest customer... and volume leverages become almost nil)? 99% of the cost of the chip is the 'making the chip' not the etch.

Or... dropping a $180 parts price to produce phone down to 179.70?

if it costs me $10Million for every code release to support this new HW architecture (remember testing EVERYTHING from fit/finish, to function(perf/heat/power/functional spec). $10 Million sounds like a lot, but that's 100 FTE. When you sell in 100+ countries, and at least that many carriers, I could see $10Million being pretty the scale (maybe $5Million, maybe $20Million). PER RELEASE.

Introducing new chips have to be very much about strategic path... forking your methods onto a 'cheap' chipset for 'saving money' on a low end phone (for a company that sells highend phones) is not strategy (Apple is not switching to SnapDragon for top of the line phones, ala switching to x86 for Macs).

Thus to argue cost savings on the order of pennies per phone, and creating long term systems complexity and risk... doesn't make sense.

Now Apple licensing from Qualcomm components for their future(next) Aseries chips... That makes total sense.

" will use a version of Qualcomm's Snapdragon system on a chip in a much-rumored low-cost iPhone, " Would simply a further move into Apple branding. A bonus here should be better phone reception figuring that Apple never did seem to incorporate Samsung's energy efficient cellular modem tech into their phones.

I'll freely admit that I don't have any numbers handy and you guys raised some good points. Still, post #7 quoted some numbers that indicate the potential of significant savings by going for an off-the-shelf SOC. Hell, Apple could just buy Qualcomm :D

Also, the upcoming A7 may well be competitive with the Snapdragon 800 (though I doubt it; it'll be clocked at 2.3 Ghz per core and Apple are usually more conservative when it comes to clock speed), but as of right now, Qualcomm have the performance crown. And yeah, it's all about the software - I'm fairly sure an HTC One with the Snapdragon 600 wouldn't stutter like my 4S does typing this post.

EDIT: an the S4 Pro IS released, it's a quad-core SOC of middling quality (when compared to the 600 and 800).

That's part of what makes it BS. Sorry but no way would Apple switch chips for this when they have a lower level chip of their own in the A4, or even just stick with the A5 which they will still need to produce at even a small level to make service parts for the iPhones and iPads they are selling now for like the next 3-5 years cause of US repair laws among others. Or at least be able to produce.

Given this why switch to another chip all together for this alleged cheaper phone. They wouldn't.

This sounds like more of a tactic to get attention for Qualcomm or Snapdragon than anything close to truth

I believe all those rumours about a low cost iPhone are garbage. Just don't see this happening and Cook's remarks reaffirm this. Apple doesn't build garbage, Apple doesn't need developing markets, where people don't consume content and don't spend money on apps anyway, it is also the premium mentality that adds to Apple's overall image.

Apple is about making money so they always need new markets. So in that regard I disagree with you. However Apple has arranged alt buying plans for their existing phones to fit those markets. And heck China is one of the biggest grey markets for unlocked phones bought at US etc stores. So it appears they have no need to develop something just for them.

Plus there's the whole social-mental thing. Part of why these are developing countries and not just poor countries is because they are trying to pull themselves into the First World. Or at least the Second. It's mentally degrading in a way to be sold something cheapened to fit what they can afford that is clearly less than in quality, versus the affirming of helping them to buy the quality item. It's like the young kid that saves up to buy himself an iPad Mini rather than have his parents buy him a cheaper toy looking tablet his friends will mock him over. That kid did good work washing and walking dogs, mowing yards or whatever to make that money and got what he wanted. Rather than taking second beat as a act of charity. Even in developing countries they feel that kind of basic human feeling of pride in similar situations.

Plus if you get lucky and an opportunity to move away to a 'better' country for school or such happens you'd be behind the line and hobbled since that lesser tech can't do everything that your colleagues/classmates stuff can do and that can hurt you depending on your situation. And then there's how you are here with a second hand better model but your family is at home with the 'cheap' one and you can't FaceTime or some other feature cause they dont have cameras or the right processor. I don't see Apple doing that.

If Apple wants cheaper SoCs: build an own foundry. Apple needs 70K wafer starts each month. Its insane! That would occupy a whole Intel state of the art fab. Why not buy one of Global foundries factories. Especially since AMD cut wafer orders by 50%. (or buy an Intel fab since they are 50% idle because they lost 30% market share to ARM)

If that is true and Apple really is in talks with Intel that could be the reason. Maybe Apple is switching to Intel but they are going to produce A-SoC for Apple. Where are their foundries. If any are in US that could be a factor. Tim is trying to seems to work with Obama's desire to pull some tech production back to US to encourage develop of workers needed to maybe pull all of it, or as much as really feasible for US sold product at least, back here. Tim shows he's trying to play ball with the idea and Obama might scratch his back on the tax break to move the money back to the US. Or at least be more willing to consider something

Well its just the fact that Apple is going to make something really cheap, using cheap parts. This isn't what Apple does. Apple is a premium brand and using cheap parts to lower the cost isn't going to increase the value of Apple's brand. This would be like BMW or Lexus making a cheap car made with very cheap parts just to serve a lower end market. This whole cheap phone doesn't make any sense to me and I think is taking Apple in the wrong direction.

You are absolutely correct. I can't see BMW or Lexus making a cheaper car, like say a Mini or a Toyota, that would be focused on a cheaper spectrum of the market.